Outcomes of Nerve Transfers in Peroneal Nerve Palsy.

Background: The objective of this work is to: (i) evaluate the postoperative outcomes after lower extremity nerve transfer (LENT) in patients with peroneal nerve palsy, and (ii) evaluate the patient and surgical factors that best predict successful restoration of ankle dorsiflexion following nerve transfer. Methods: A retrospective cohort of prospectively collected data included all patients who underwent LENT (2010-2018). Two independent reviewers performed data collection. Primary outcome measures were: (i) clinically with British Medical Research Council (MRC) strength assessments, and (ii) electrodiagnostically with nascent motor unit potentials. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive and nonparametric statistics. Results: Nine patients (56% male, mean age 38.3, range 18-57 years) underwent LENT surgery a mean of 4.3 months following injury (range 2.2-6.4 months). Mean follow-up was 15.6 months (range 9.1-28.2 months). Postoperatively, ankle dorsiflexion (P = .015) and ankle eversion (P = .041) increased significantly. After surgery, 44% achieved MRC 4, 33% obtained MRC 1 motor recovery, and 22% sustained MRC 0. A shorter time to surgery was associated with significantly better outcomes (P = .049). Conclusions: It appears that there is a bimodal distribution between responders and nonresponders to LENT for foot drop. Further research is required to elucidate patient and surgical factors that prognosticate success.

Contexte: Les objectifs de cette étude étaient les suivants : (i) évaluer les résultats postopératoires après un transfert de nerf dans le membre inférieur (LENT; lower extremity nerve transfer) chez des patients ayant une paralysie du nerf péronier et (ii) évaluer les facteurs propres au patient et à la chirurgie qui permettent de prédire le mieux possible le succès d'une restauration de la dorsiflexion de la cheville après le transfert nerveux. Méthodes: Une cohorte rétrospective de données collectées de façon prospective a inclus tous les patients ayant bénéficié d'un LENT de 2010 à 2018. Deux réviseurs indépendants ont réalisé la collecte des données. Les critères de jugement principaux étaient les suivants : (i) cliniques avec des évaluations de la force selon l'échelle MRC et (ii) électrodiagnostiques avec potentiels d'unités motrices naissantes. Une analyse statistique a été réalisée au moyen de statistiques descriptives et non paramétriques. Résultats: Neuf patients (hommes : 56%, âge moyen : 38,3 ans, extrêmes : 18 à 57 ans) ont subi une LENT, en moyenne 4,3 mois après une blessure (extrêmes : 2,2 à 6,4 mois). Le suivi moyen a été de 15,6 mois (extrêmes : 9,1 à 28,2 mois). En postopératoire, la dorsiflexion de la cheville (P = 015) et l'éversion de la cheville (P = 041) ont augmenté de façon significative. Après l'intervention chirurgicale, 44% des patients ont atteint un score de 4 sur l'échelle MRC, 33% ont obtenu une récupération motrice cotée à 1 et 22% ont conservé une cote MRC de 0. Un délai plus court avant la chirurgie a été associé à des résultats significativement meilleurs (P = .049). Conclusions: Il semble y avoir une répartition bimodale entre les répondeurs et les nonrépondeurs à la chirurgie de LENT pour la chute du pied. Des recherches supplémentaires sont nécessaires pour renseigner les facteurs pronostiques de succès liés au patient et à l'intervention chirurgicale.

A date pit induced aorto-oesophageal fistula: a case report and concise literature review.

Aorto-oesophageal fistula (AEF) is rare and fatal without intervention. Having consumed a date pit 2 weeks prior, the patient in this case presented with the 'Chiari' triad of chest pain, sentinel arterial upper gastro-intestinal haemorrhage and exsanguination after an asymptomatic interval. Following resuscitation, the patient was managed with a Blakemore tube with both oesophageal and gastric balloons inflated to systemic pressures. An aortic stent graft was planned but the patient died on the operating table. AEFs can be treated surgically with either open or endovascular repair. Open repair is highly risky and involves combined replacement/bypass of the thoracic aorta along with resection/repair of the involved oesophagus. Endovascular repair can prevent fatal exsanguination and increase the likelihood of survival but is associated with a significant rate of secondary infection, recurrence of fistula, mediastinitis and sepsis. Further studies are required to inform on management.

A comparison of patient-reported outcomes between Alloderm and Dermacell in immediate alloplastic breast reconstruction: A randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Alloderm and Dermacell are the two leading human acellular dermal matrices (ADM) in immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). Despite differences in sterility, consistency, thickness and cost, there are no comparative trials to date to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) between the two products. The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a difference in patient-reported outcomes (as measured by the BREAST-Q) between patients reconstructed with Alloderm and Dermacell. METHODS: A single center, open-label, randomized control trial of patients undergoing IBR with an implant for breast cancer or breast cancer prophylaxis was performed. Patients were randomized to either Alloderm or Dermacell. Baseline demographic data were compared, and linear mixed models were used to identify associations with BREAST-Q over time. RESULTS: Between June 2016 and October 2018, 62 patients were randomized into two groups, 31(50%) Alloderm and 31(50%) Dermacell. Of these, 23(74%) patients in the Alloderm group and 27(87%) patients of the Dermacell group filled out BREAST-Q questionnaires. Baseline BREAST-Q scores with respect to satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and physical well-being were similar between groups (p>0.05). At 3 months postoperatively, the Alloderm group had a statistically significant improvement with respect to satisfaction with breasts (67 vs 53, p = 0.03), satisfaction with overall results (85 vs 61, p = 0.003), satisfaction with the surgeon (89 vs 67, p = 0.01), and satisfaction with information provided (74 vs 59, p = 0.02). At 12 months postoperatively, there were no statistically significant differences in PROM between groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: We report the first randomized controlled trial to date comparing patient-reported outcomes of the two most commonly used ADMs in IBR in Canada. Although a short-term analysis favors the use of Alloderm, there does not appear to be any difference in outcomes between the two products in the longer term.